Reviews findings from a survey entitled “Employers, Providers’ Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (EPAB)” where different types of job developers are asked about their attitudes towards employers and the employment process for people with disabilities.

“Despite numerous employment initiatives, people with disabilities are significantly more likely to experience unemployment and consequentially, reduced economic and social well-being and a diminished quality of life (Gilbride & Stensrud, 2008) than their nondisabled peers…Although we have a growing knowledge base about effective strategies, job developers do not consistently implement highly recommended job development practices” (p.2).

In 2011 Transcen “developed and administered the 'Employment Providers’ Attitudes & Beliefs Scale' (EPABS) to job development professionals in New Jersey and Maryland” (p.3). This technical study examined the results from the second sample administration of the Employer Attitudes & Beliefs Study. It offered some preliminary conclusions on the different types of job developers and implications for service provider managers seeking to maximize the capabilities of their job developers. (Author: Author and Website Staff)

Major Findings & Recommendations

“It appeared from this study and previous research that there are different types of job developers who can be characterized based on their attitudes and beliefs towards employers and the employment process. The type dimension is important because people behave in ways that are consistent with their beliefs and attitudes, and it is more difficult to shape or modify behaviors without understanding or acknowledging the underlying motivators” (p.8-9). • Each of the job developer types identified in this present study has its own strengths and weaknesses. (p.9) • The most savvy job developers are those that understand the attitudes, beliefs, and accompanying skills of each type in order to expand their toolkit of strategies. (p.9) • “Supply Siders” (those that emphasized “selling disability”) tended to be newer to the field and express lower self-efficacy beliefs about job development/placement which suggests potential training and professional development interventions. Early in their careers, these individuals (who also tend to have a pessimistic disposition) might benefit more from efficacy-building tasks (achieving incremental accomplishments) rather than being exposed to new complicated skills sets (such as those required in demand-side job development). (p.9) • “Traditionalists” (those that relied on moral or legal imperatives to encourage employers to hire applicants) who rely on practices such as appealing to employers’ charitable sense or relying on tax incentives may benefit from training that emphasizes skills required to “close a deal” or persuade employers of the benefits of hiring by paying attention to the bottom line. (p.9) (Abstractor: Author and Website Staff)